Name: 「簡直是瘋了！」眾議院民主黨人評論川普政府關閉艾爾帕索空域的處理方式 (‘Sheer insanity’: House Democrat reacts to Trump admin.’s handling of El Paso airspace closure)
Uploaded: 2026-02-14T23:04:13.000Z
Duration: 9 min 14 s

Yeah, people learn, you know, people learn.

對啊，大家都會學到東西，你知道的，人就是會學。

轉承詞

That was President Trump this afternoon when he was asked if there would be accountability for the chaos this week after the FAA and Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy imposed a 10 day shutdown of El Paso's airspace, only to reverse course just hours later despite the White House claim the airspace was closed because of cartel drones breaching US Airspace for four sources tell NBC News it was in response to the testing of US Military technology that can be used to take down drones.

今天下午，當被問到 FAA 和交通部長 Sean Duffy 下令關閉 El Paso 空域十天，卻在幾小時後又改變主意時，川普總統是這麼說的。儘管白宮聲稱空域關閉是因為有卡特爾的無人機侵入美國領空，但 NBC 新聞的四個消息來源指出，這其實是為了回應美國軍事技術的測試，這種技術可以用來擊落無人機。

Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Adam Smith.

現在加入我們的是民主黨國會議員 Adam Smith。

He serves as the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee.

他是眾議院軍事委員會的首席議員。

Congressman Smith, thank you so much for being here today.

Smith 議員，非常感謝您今天撥冗前來。

And we are going to get to El Paso in just a moment.

But I do want to start in Munich, the security conference.

但我想先從慕尼黑的安全會議開始。

At the conference, your trip was canceled because of this partial government shutdown.

在會議上，你的行程因為這次部分政府關閉而取消了。

The German chancellor in his opening statement talked about the world order as we know it no longer existing.

德國總理在開幕致詞時提到，我們所知的世界秩序已不復存在。

Congressman, I wonder what you can tell us.

議員先生，我想知道您能告訴我們什麼。

Well, first of all, it's very hard to argue with the German chancellor when you look at the way President Trump has treated the NATO alliance, you know, slapping tariffs all across the world.

嗯，首先，當你看到川普總統如何對待北約同盟，你知道，對全世界加徵關稅，就很難反駁德國總理的說法。

I saw a headline the other day in a foreign affairs news article that described the United States as a predatory hegemon, which is something we have not been before.

我前幾天在一篇外交事務新聞報導中看到一個標題，將美國描述為掠奪性的霸權國家，這以前的美國可不是這樣。

Not that we don't pursue our own interests.

並不是說我們不追求自己的利益。

We do, but we've had respect for international institutions.

我們追求，但我們一直尊重國際機構。

President Trump has withdrawn us from a number of different treaties and antagonized our allies and partners.

川普總統讓我們退出了好幾個不同的條約，並惹惱了我們的盟友和夥伴。

Now, I still believe that the United States can still get that back in a post Trump world.

現在，我仍然相信，在後川普時代，美國仍然可以重拾這些。

But I share the German chancellor's concern about the US Becoming a solo actor and not really participating in the global order that we did so much to help create over the last 80 years.

但我同意德國總理的擔憂，美國正在成為一個單獨行動者，不再真正參與我們過去80年來為之創建的全球秩序。

You say you think the US can get that back.

你說你認為美國可以重拾這些。

The Danish prime minister called for European allies to band together.

丹麥首相呼籲歐洲盟友團結一致。

I want to read you what was said and then get your reaction to that.

我想唸一段話給您聽，然後聽聽您的看法。

Within this context, is it possible to get back to it saying, quote, a Europe that is not able and willing to protect itself is going to die at some point?

在這個脈絡下，我們能不能回到她說的這句話：「一個無法也無意自我保護的歐洲，終將走向滅亡」？

The prime minister said the old world will not come back.

首相說，舊世界不會再回來了。

So she obviously disagrees with your assessment that it's possible to get back to the old world world order.

所以她顯然不同意你認為有可能回到舊世界秩序的看法。

Well, I would say we're not going to get back exactly to the old world order and nor should we.

嗯，我會說，我們不可能完全回到舊世界秩序，而且我們也不應該。

To a certain degree, the world has changed substantially.

在某種程度上，世界已經發生了巨大的變化。

You have the rise of countries like India, Brazil, South Africa, other countries are playing role.

你看到了印度、巴西、南非等國家的崛起，其他國家也在扮演角色。

所以，在某種程度上正在轉變這個秩序。

But the basic princip that the US should participate in an international rules based system that I think we can get back to.

不過，美國應該參與一個基於規則的國際體系，我認為我們可以回到這個基本原則。

Even though President Trump has threatened it.

I mean, threatening Canada, threatening Greenland, threatening Panama, basically implying that the use of force might makes right is going to be a US Approach.

我的意思是，威脅加拿大、威脅格陵蘭、威脅巴拿馬，基本上暗示武力至上將是美國的做法。

That is what I think we can get the US Back to a focus on.

我認為這才是我們可以讓美國重新關注的焦點。

It's really important that so many members of Congress are in Munich right now to reinforce the message that the overwhelming majority US don't agree with President Trump simply shattering that order and saying that the US Is now basically going to be in it for ourselves, period, full stop.

非常重要的一點是，有這麼多國會議員現在在慕尼黑，來加強傳達一個訊息：絕大多數美國人並不贊同川普總統就這樣打破秩序，說美國現在基本上要單打獨鬥，就這樣，句點。

I think it's important that our members of Congress are there delivering a different message.

我認為我們的國會議員在那裡傳達不同的訊息很重要。

Well, and given that, do you think that European allies can still count on the United States?

好吧，鑑於此，你認為歐洲盟友還能依靠美國嗎？

You are saying there's a strong message being sent right now by members of Congress that yes, they should feel confident in that.

你說現在國會議員們正在傳達一個強烈的訊息，是的，他們應該對此感到有信心。

But what do you say to the skeptics out there?

但你對那些懷疑論者有什麼話說？

I wouldn't say that they should feel confident in that.

我不會說他們應該對此感到有信心。

It's more that not feel that they should not feel that all hope is lost.

更像是他們不應該覺得所有希望都破滅了。

You know, I mean, I think right now they should feel that they can count a lot less on the US Than they used to.

喔，我的意思是，我認為現在他們應該覺得能依靠美國的程度比以前少很多。

Look, one part of this, I mean, if Europe wants to become more capable of defending itself and contribute more to the collective defense at this point, I think that's fine.

聽著，這其中一部分，我的意思是，如果歐洲在這個時候想讓自己更有能力自衛，並為集體防禦做出更多貢獻，我認為這很好。

I mean, I think we need to understand that it was by design that they didn't.

我的意思是，我認為我們需要明白，他們沒有這樣做是刻意為之。

We provided security because Europe had spent the thousand years before World War II fighting each other relentlessly.

我們提供安全保障，因為在第二次世界大戰之前的一千年裡，歐洲一直在無情地互相爭鬥。

So we didn't want them building up their militaries.

所以我們不希望他們建立軍隊。

They stopped fighting amongst each other and we had a pretty good 80 years.

他們停止了互相爭鬥，我們也是以度過了相當不錯的八十年。

It's going to shift a little bit now, but

I don't think we should lose track of the benefit of the approach that we took over the course of the last 80 years.

但我認為我們不應該忘記，過去八十年來我們所採取的做法所帶來的益處。

Well, let me turn to El Paso now and ask you about this confusion that remains over what exactly caused that shutdown of the airspace there this week.

好的，現在讓我轉向 El Paso，問你關於這週空中交通管制關閉的確切原因，至今仍有許多困惑。

NBC News is reporting this started with a dispute or a miscommunication between the Pentagon and the FAA over testing the military's counter drone lasers at Fort Bliss, which is right next to the El Paso airport.

NBC 新聞報導，這起事件源於五角大廈和 FAA 之間關於在 El Paso 機場旁的 Fort Bliss 測試軍方反無人機雷射的爭議或溝通不良。

Just for folks who are watching, are you closer to getting specific answers about what exactly caused the shutdown?

只是想讓觀眾知道，你們離確切知道是什麼原因導致關閉的答案還有多近？

And look, there's two sort of separate, important issues.

而且你看，有兩個獨立但重要的問題。

One is just the sheer insanity of the way the Trump administration has approached this.

其中一個是川普政府處理這件事方式的純粹瘋狂。

I mean, we've got agencies all controlled by the executive branch, controlled by Donald Trump, the faa, the Department of Defense, Customs and Border Patrol.

我的意思是，我們有這麼多機構都由行政部門掌控，由唐納·川普掌控，像是 FAA、國防部、海關和邊境巡防局。

Those three agencies are all involved in this, in this shutdown, and

這三個機構都跟這次的關閉有關，

但我們卻沒有聽到一個明確的答案。

From the moment this happened, nobody has simply come out from the administration and said, okay, here's what happened.

從這件事發生的那一刻起，沒有任何一位政府官員出面說，好的，事情是這樣的。

Worse is they have not communicated at all with the local officials in El Paso.

更糟的是，他們根本沒有跟德州的 El Paso 當地官員溝通過。

They said it was going to be shut down for 10 days.

So everyone's scrambling around trying to figure out how to deal with that.

所以大家都在手忙腳亂地想辦法應對。

And then they said, no, just kidding, we're gonna open it up in a few hours.

然後他們又說，沒有啦，開玩笑的，幾個小時後就會開放了。

So that lack of communication, this is the way the Trump administration runs things autocratically.

所以這種溝通不良，這就是川普政府獨裁的運作方式。

They make decisions, they're accountable to no one.

Now, the second thing is the actual problem going on.

接下來，第二件事是正在發生的實際問題。

The department is critically part of that, but

國防部是其中關鍵的一環，但是

you also have to do it in a way that doesn't jeopardize civilian aviation, which means the FAA and DoD need to be in close communication.

你也必須以不危及民航安全的方式來處理，這意味著 FAA 和 DoD 需要密切溝通。

And clearly they were not in this instance.

And the fact that none of them are even coming out and saying exactly what happened shows that this is an ongoing problem that the administration should.

而且他們沒有人出來說明到底發生了什麼事，這顯示這是一個持續存在的問題，政府應該要處理。

Congressman, I do want to ask you, before I let you go about this funding fight over reforms to ICE funding for the entire Department of Homeland Security lapses at midnight.

議員，在我讓您離開之前，我想問您關於 ICE 資金改革的爭議，國土安全部的資金將在午夜到期。

As you well know, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer shut down the idea of funding those agencies separately.

您很清楚，參議院少數黨領袖查克·舒默駁回了將這些機構分開資助的想法。

Agencies like TSA and fema, which are a part of dhs.

像是 TSA 和 FEMA 這些屬於國土安全部的機構。

I want to play for you a little bit of what he had to say and get your reaction on the other side.

我想讓您聽聽他怎麼說，然後在下一段聽聽您的反應。

All the Republicans have to do is meet our requests here and negotiate in a serious way and we can pass the whole thing.

所有共和黨人只要在這裡滿足我們的要求並認真協商，我們就可以通過整個法案。